It is common
to find the Church Fathers saying that the meanings of the Hebrew Scriptures
are obscure. Thus, for example, Justin Matry writes that in the Jewish Bible
there is much that is “expressed mysteriously in metaphorical or obscure
language or . . . hinted by symbolic actions” (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with
Trypho, Thomas B. Falls, trans., rev. with intro. by Thomas P. Halton,
Michael Slusser, ed. [Washington: Catholic University of America, 2002 (a. 135
CE)], p. 106). Similarly, Origen argued that there is “no taint of human eloquence
. . . mingled with the truth of the doctrines” of Scripture. As he writes, “If
our books had attracted men to belief because they were composed with
rhetorical skill or philosophical cleverness, our faith would undoubtedly have
been supposed to rest in the skillful use of words and in human wisdom, and not
in the power of God” (Origen, On First Principles, G. W. Butterworth,
trans. [New York, Haper & Row, 1966], p. 267) But are the Hebrew texts in question
really any more obscure than the writings of Homer or Plato? I doubt it. Part of
the obscurity may be the result of poor translations into Greek and Latin. And
part of it is, I believe, a result of the fact that the Church Fathers were
already quite removed from the purposes for which these texts were written. (Yoram
Hazony, The Philosophy of Hebrew Scripture [Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2012], 287 n. 2)
